Government should be responsible for funding and controlling scientific research rather than private organizations. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Scientific developments depend on the researches which needs funds and qualified researchers. Some people believe that the monetary source should be subsidized by the governments. I am favor in this idea. The official financial supports are usually big enough to finish projects and decrease the bias rates in the results of articles.
In the first ground, sometimes a well-designed study needs a substantial amount of money which cannot be afforded by private organizations or they may be reluctant for the investment. For example, new drugs researches are mainly by National Health organization in USA. The private sector doesn't want to waste their money if the study is comprehensive and the results are unprofittable.Because of the fact that, the groundbreaking scientific developments has emerged thanks to the subsidization of governments.
Secondly, the private sponsors may want to change the result of the study according to their interest, thus the objectivity of the study become controversial. For instance, the most perpetuated and cited articles in Pubmed is usually supported by the governments. It is possible to say that the most valuable projects have created with the sponsor of the official organizations as a result of increased objectivity and motivation of researchers. Briefly, the bias can be eliminated with the more governmental supports.
In conclusion, the concern about the source of money in the scientific researches is debatable. I am agree with the idea that the governments should be the main supporters for the scientific studies to supply enough money and to get reliable results. In the future, if the private sector enlarge and become more objective, it may have more valuable support than now.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 336, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... bias rates in the results of articles. In the first ground, sometimes a well-de...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 289, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...organization in USA. The private sector doesnt want to waste their money if the study ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 386, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Because
...nsive and the results are unprofittable.Because of the fact that, the groundbreaking sc...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 386, Rule ID: BECAUSE_OF_THE_FACT_THAT[1]
Message: This phrase is redundant. Use simply 'because'.
Suggestion: Because
...nsive and the results are unprofittable.Because of the fact that, the groundbreaking scientific developm...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 466, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...king scientific developments has emerged thanks to the subsidization of governmen...
^^
Line 5, column 403, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...l organizations as a result of increased objectivity and motivation of researcher...
^^
Line 7, column 102, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'agreed'.
Suggestion: agreed
...cientific researches is debatable. I am agree with the idea that the governments shou...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 368, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ay have more valuable support than now.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
briefly, first, if, may, second, secondly, so, thus, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1473.0 1615.20841683 91% => OK
No of words: 272.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41544117647 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.288218112 2.80592935109 117% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 176.041082164 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.522058823529 0.561755894193 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 455.4 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.9194883552 49.4020404114 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.214285714 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4285714286 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06120827912 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.01903807615 159% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.193052948501 0.244688304435 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0649127379608 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0534170948169 0.0667982634062 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122667233521 0.151304729494 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0565498737386 0.056905535591 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.